didn't mean that Teak, i wouldn't lie, just wouldn't go this year.
Wasn't sarcastic at all. Then what you are saying is that you will lie on the questionaire. MOVE ON.
I was not wanting to have to tell someone that as I am not a usual user and don't want to get flagged as I usually give blood on an annual basis and do not have drug problems with the exception of this. Was that a sarcastic answer Teak?
Tell them you snort coke and see..
One last questions, does anyone know if I can still donate blood in Canada? I am scheduled for my regular donation next week and I don't want to be embarrassed if this comes up.
I will move on but just wanted to make sure I didnt break any rules with my post being removed. Thanks all
I see it has been removed, I apologize if I was not to post something from another site, did i break the rules or why was the post taken down.
His last line is just stupid...theoretical risks warrant a test.
I'll leave any personal feeling about the guy out.
Here is a great overview from another source that it to the point and speaks in real world scenarios like you guys. Anyways, I thought it was nice to have an explanation instead of just a no risk answer (no offense to anyone here as you are answering lots of questions).
The reason you haven't found anything on the HIV transmission risks related
to snorting drugs is because there isn't really any evidence that people
have been infected with HIV that way.
What you be referring to is HEP C, which can be transmitted by
shared-snorting paraphenalia.
HIV does not live long enough outside of the body to transmit via snorting.
Hypothetically speaking, if there was direct blood from someone's nose -
who was HIV positive, and this blood somehow got into an opening in the
lining of your nose's mucosal lining right away, then conceivably you could
get HIV that way...people do get hit by lightening twice...but
realistically not enough scientific data has been collected for us to say
that this is a realistic concern.
I Just wanted to post this response from the doc as I didnt realize you could search the archives. It is pretty straight and clear and has made me realize how silly I was being.
by Edward W Hook, MD, Jan 04, 2009 03:43PM
You have posted on the wrong site. Questions about HIV belong on the HIV prevention site. I will do my best to answer your questions with this reply but, if you have additional questions or follow-up they must be on the HIV Prevention site. Sorry.
Your risk of getting HIV from sharing a cocaine "sniffer" is about the same as your risk from kissing or drinking from a glass just used by a person with HIV - zero. This is the case even if the person who used the pipe before you was HIV infected and left a small amount of nasal secretions on the device. Similarly, your history of nosebleeds does not change your risk.
You have nothing to worry about and have no medical reason for testing. Take care. EWH
Advice for others, dont let your anxiety get the best of you.
Thanks Vance and all on here. It is great to be able to chat with some people about it anyways. Just wish it was a little more cut and dry and people would all provide not such conservative propaganda. I just got worried as I though AVERT ws a pretty reputable organization but maybe I have to think twice about that.
Thanks Vance, it seems the few places i have looked at for advice by phone have all said a small risk and should get tested but they most likely are conservative and covering there buts. Not sure why they do this? to instill fear in people or just get them tested. Hmm, i just dont know anymore. Has there ever been a case documented on this or is it all theoretical?
I should also say that they might be overly conservative when it comes to risk. But as Teak said you did not have one.
Because they have no clue what they are talking about.
Okay, one last comment to make sure. Here is and email i received from AVERT on the exposure (I took them as being the leading people in my country on knowledge on this and now I am even more confused)
Hello,
Many thanks for your email. From the situation you have described
there is a small HIV risk. The straw that you used could contain
traces of HIV but the risk is small. I would advice you to be tested
for HIV just to ensure that you have not contracted HIV.
In order to receive accurate results from a HIV test it is advisable
to be tested 12 weeks after the initial exposure as this is called the
window period. When you are outside of this period all results from
testing are accurate.
Why do they say small risk?
Anyone have good sites that review this stuff? I have trouble as there are many sites and all have different opinions. Some say one thing and the other say something else. Anyways, any advice is appreciated.
Wow, that was quick and to the point. That is what i thought, thanks Teak. Out of curiosity, what is a good site to educate myself on this? way to much out there on the net.